HIGH COURT OF KERALA
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
SHEIK MUSTHAFA – Appellant
Versus
THANKA – Respondent
Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2024 This Second Appeal has been preferred by the respondent in AS No.155/2002 on the file of District Court, Palakkad, who is the plaintiff in OS. No.344/1996 on the file of Munsiff Court, Chittur, against the judgment and decree allowing the appeal and dismissing the suit. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are hereafter referred to as per their rank before the trial court.
2. According to the plaintiff, the defendants 1 and 2, who are mother and son, borrowed a sum of Rs.40,000/- from him on 10.8.1993, after executing a joint promissory note promising to repay the amount with interest. In spite of demand, the defendants failed to repay the amount and hence the suit.
3. The defendants denied having any money transaction with the plaintiff. According to them, they have borrowed an amount of R.20,000/- from one Mohammed, S/o.Vellakutty in 1993, after getting their signature on some blank paper with revenue stamp affixed thereon. They had repaid a sum of Rs.10,000/- and only a balance amount of Rs.10,000/- is due to Muhammed. The plaint promissory note is a forged one.
4. After evaluating the available evidence, the trial court decreed
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.